Comments by "Charles Brightman" (@charlesbrightman4237) on "“Brexit was about independence.” Euronews interviews Nigel Farage" video.
-
5
-
Petros Kostas
For a nation, yes. Here is also a long copy and paste of my comment from that same video referenced above. This comment addresses 'individuality versus the larger society of individuals'. Read it or don't read it, fully your individual free will choice, assuming we actually have individual freewill.
"
A lot of this economic talks seems to come down to:
We appear to be individuals in a larger society of individuals. (Whether as actual individual people, local towns, cities, states, nations, species, basically an individual in a larger group). What is 'best' for an individual, may or may not be what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals. And conversely, what is 'best' for the larger society of individuals, may or may not be what is 'best' for the individual.
But, if a choice had to be made concerning a certain topic of whose 'best' should take precedent over the other's 'best', whose 'best' should take precedent? If for an individual, which individual? All individuals? If for a larger society of individuals, which larger society of individuals? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
This natural tension between individual versus larger society of individuals, and who decides, and by what authority they and they alone get to decide, is the cause of much strife, suffering and death in this world.
But, it appears we are in fact individuals in a larger society of individuals. How exactly do we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, want to exist while we do exist? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
But then also, consider what appears to be our true destiny:
1. We are ALL going to die one day from something.
(The observable evidence for this just seems to be overwhelming).
2. We are ALL going to forget everything we ever knew and experienced.
(While modern science does not know what 'consciousness' actually is, nor how memories are stored and retrieved, nor how thoughts actually occur, they do all appear to be a function of the physical brain. When the physical brain dies for it's final time, 'we' die, for all of future eternity.)
The sum total of our existence is only what we leave behind, including how our existence affected the larger society that we existed in. And normally, it appears that the larger society outlasts any single individual. So, by default, the larger society would normally get their way in the end anyway.
But now also, there always has to be at least one single individual left in the larger society for anything or anyone to have continued meaning to. If not, then one day there would be no conscious entities left to care about anything or anyone ever again throughout all of future eternity. Life itself would all be ultimately meaningless in the grandest scheme of things. Life itself only matters to life as long as life itself still exists. So one goal of individuals and the larger society of individuals, might be to try to keep life itself alive so that life itself has continued meaning and purpose (if it's even possible to do).
There are no known immortal entities that actually exist. (While many people believe such entities exist, there is no actual evidence at this time that I am aware of that such entities actually exist). And we are the only publically known life to exist in this entire universe at this time. (Although other life in the universe most probably exists).
But now, the 6th mass extinction event is most probably going to start this century due to natural reasons. (Some say it's already started). Science also tells us that this Earth and it's Sun won't last for literally all of future eternity. So, only those species that make it out of this solar system continue to consciously survive. Everybody else dies and goes extinct. And, we exist in a spiral shaped galaxy, it is spiral shaped for a reason in a cause and effect universe. Most probably our solar system is being pulled toward our galactic center, (possibly giving us a relative perspective of an expanding universe). If true, then at least one species also has to get out of this galaxy one day, otherwise all life in this galaxy dies and goes extinct.
Now also, if science is correct concerning this expanding universe, then either 'a', it would either end in a 'big freeze' or 'b', stop expanding one day, collapse back in upon itself, only to 'bang' again one day expanding into another version of the universe in a never ending cycle. But if true, then only species that make it out of this universe continue to consciously survive (if it's even possible to do), otherwise all life in this entire universe dies and goes extinct.
3. Of which then, all life itself is ultimately forgotten one day in future eternity as if it never ever existed at all in the first place, as one day there wouldn't be a conscious entity left to care about anything or anyone ever again.
So, longer story shortened, we either need, individually and as a larger society of individuals, a very pro-active space program or let's all just party like there no tomorrow because one day we would be correct and life itself would all be ultimately meaningless anyway in the grandest scheme of things.
But then again, what exactly do we, individually and as a larger society of individuals, choose? And who decides? And by what authority do they and they alone get to decide?
What exactly matters throughout all of future eternity and to whom does it eternally matter to, if even to any conscious entity at all? Rise above life itself to see the bigger picture of it all.
"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
paranoidx9
a. What backs the value of the euro?
b. What backs the value of the pound?
c. Here in the USA, I believe it is now basically only the USA's reputation which backs the USA's currency. Hence though, with USA's ever increasing massive debt, on top of some of the things the USA does that the rest of the world doesn't like, (hence the USA getting a worse reputation), of which the USA has already been financially downgraded at least in my lifetime, it seems that some of the world wants to get away from the USA's currency.
d. As far as international currency exchange goes, yes I am familiar with the supply and demand and how it supposedly affects a nation's currency. BUT, consider also: The two things that actually add the value to a nation's currency.
1. The value of whatever backs that currency.
2. The amount of currency in existence.
Hence, if the value of whatever backs a nation's currency changes in value keeping the quantity of currency the same, the value of the currency changes. In addition, if the quantity of the currency changes keeping the value of whatever backs that currency the same, the value of the currency changes.
But now, in the international market with currency exchanges, yes the supply and demand curves are utilized which affects the different currencies' values, BUT should they really affect the different currencies' values? For example, the value of a nation's currency is as established above. The supply and demand of that currency on the international market should not really affect the value of that currency. I believe whomever set up this supply and demand curves so that it appears automatically affects even the value of the currency of international currency exchanges, has set up a system that could possibly either unintentionally or even intentionally be exploited to manipulate currency values of the various nations, potentially reaping vast amounts of wealth and power over other nations. Especially concerning very rich people and/or rich international corporations and/or rich nations who either want to help or hurt nations, even possibly including their own one way or another. Basically, the whole international currency exchange system is corrupt. Or at least so it seems to me.
1
-
1